Travis B. Williams, «Reciprocity and Suffering in 1 Peter 2,19-20: Reading "caris" in Its Ancient Social Context.», Vol. 97 (2016) 421-439
Scholars have long debated whether "caris" in 1 Pet 2,19-20 should be understood as the unmerited favor which is divinely bestowed upon those who please God, or whether it represents a human action that secures a favorable response from God. What interpreters have continued to overlook, however, are the ancient social dynamics which underlie this passage. By interpreting "caris" within the framework of reciprocity and gift-exchange in the Greco-Roman world, this study brings fresh perspective to a problem which has long divided scholarship, and also suggests a new direction for understanding the letter's theology of suffering.
432 T.B. WIllIAMs
reciprocity and gift-exchange. More specifically, it refers to the human
reciprocation of God’s beneficence. In the same way that an ancient
Hellenistic community might fulfill its obligation toward a benefactor
through a public ceremony of recognition for gifts received, the author
defines the endurance of unjust suffering as the appropriate reciprocal
response toward the favors which God has bestowed upon the readers.
Below we will demonstrate how this understanding of ca,rij pro-
vides the best explanation for the language of 1 Pet 2,19-20. We will
begin by first situating this usage within the broader framework of
1 Peter, exploring how ca,rij functions within the author’s social strategy.
Thereafter, we will consider the significance of the fact that ca,rij
is defined (or perhaps, redefined) in 1 Pet 2,19-20.
1. The Meaning and Function of ca,rij in 1 Peter
Throughout the epistle, the Petrine author seeks to portray God as
a benevolent benefactor and the people of God as grateful recipients 24.
In doing so, he employs ca,rij (or some cognate) eleven times in five
brief chapters (1,2.10.13; 2,19.20; 3,7; 4,10bis; 5,5.10.12). Apart from
the Pauline (and deutero-Pauline) literature, no other place in the New
Testament has such a concentrated use of the term. As a way of com-
bating any temptation to attribute the present difficulties to divine dis-
favor, the author reminds his audience that God is “the God of every
favor (ca,ritoj)” (5,10). What this means is that divine beneficence has
been lavishly bestowed on the people of God (1,10; 3,7; 4,10; 5,5). In-
cluded in these gifts are the salvation and new life into which the read-
ers have entered as a result of their new Christian existence (1,10; 3,7).
Further benefits are contingent upon certain ethical requirements, par-
ticularly a person’s display of humility (5,5). Because of the boon with
which the recipients have been entrusted, it is necessary for them to
exercise responsible stewardship. Part of this involves the appropriate
discharge of the spiritual gifts (cari,smata) with which they are ex-
pected to serve the community of believers (4,10-11). The author even
tries to convince his audience that their present sufferings represent
God’s “favor” (ca,rij) toward them (5,12; see below). Nevertheless, the
full extent of God’s beneficence will not be received until the end
(1,13). It is then that Christ will return, bringing the full and complete
blessing of God.
24
see F.W. DANkeR, Benefactor. epigraphic study of a Graeco-Roman and
New Testament semantic Field (st. louis 1982) 452-453.